Abortionist The New Age Nazi's

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='JClives' post='1135306' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:28 AM']

THE COMPARISON IS LUDACRIS!!!![/quote]


Whats the rapper to do with this? Show us how it is ludicrous.

[quote name='JClives' post='1135306' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:28 AM']
Ya know come to think of it... the Nazi's also had peopel that dressed up in uniforms when they talked to mass amounts of people... OMG the Catholic Church has something similar with Nazi's!

See how rediculous this is?!
[/quote]

If you want to discuss that make your own thread otherwise its off topic

[pcabibi]

will you people please stop trying to take advantage of my bad grammer and stick to the point? I'm not in the market for teacher

[track2004]

Crazy people are part of every issue. Margaret Sanger was crazy and bigoted and we get that. J Edgar Hoover was kinda nuts too but we don't hate the FBI for it.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1135309' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:31 AM']
I'll give you that: the governers of the nation are not systematically attacking a specific people. thogh Margaret Sanger, founder of planned parenthood, was very clear in her goal of decreasing the black population through abortion... and there are some folks around pushing the abortion agenda in high powerful places who do so with the express purpose of decreasing the poor population... but yes, there is not a systematic effort.
[/quote]

That would depend on whether the unborn are a group of specific people. And they are. The government is attacking a specific people, the people not yet born.

[track2004]

Courts don't seem them as people.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='track2004' post='1135328' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:45 AM']
Crazy people are part of every issue. Margaret Sanger was crazy and bigoted and we get that. J Edgar Hoover was kinda nuts too but we don't hate the FBI for it.
[/quote]

Yet Margaret Sanger's dream is being fulfilled...

"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population…"
Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood


[quote]Between 1882 and 1968, 3,446 Blacks were lynched in the U.S. That number is surpassed in less than 3 days by abortion.

1,452 African-American children are killed each day by the heinous act of abortion.

3 out of 5 pregnant African-American women will abort their child.

Since 1973 there has been over 13 million Black children killed and their precious mothers victimized by the U.S. abortion industry.

In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King said, "The early church brought an end to such things as INFANTICIDE." What would Martin Luther King say to the church today?
The Rev. Jesse Jackson once said:
"That is why the Constitution called us three-fifths human and then whites further dehumanized us by calling us 'nice black men'. It was part of the dehumanizing process. The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify that which they wanted to do and not even feel like they had done anything wrong. Those advocates of taking life prior to birth do not call it killing or murder, they call it abortion. They further never talk about aborting a baby because that would imply something human. Rather they talk about aborting the fetus. Fetus sounds less than human and therefore abortion can be justified".

Jackson's massive flip-flop on the abortion issue is further proof that his political future is far more important to him than are his principles.

With 1/3 of all abortions performed on Black women, the abortion industry has received over 4,000,000,000 (yes, billion) dollars from the Black community.[/quote]


source [url="http://blackgenocide.org/"]http://blackgenocide.org/[/url]

[quote name='track2004' post='1135339' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:52 AM']
Courts don't seem them as people.
[/quote]


Exactly the point. The Nazi Germany Courts did not see Jews as people either.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='JClives' post='1135317' date='Dec 5 2006, 12:39 AM']
ok I'm glad to see we're all not totally illogical here. I do not subscripe to Margaret Sanger's idealogy. Now as far as the person is considered... i believe that definition should be left up to the Woman who is pregnant... not the government. each side has thier own arguement and there is nothing aboslute prooving one side right over the other. Until that happens then that definition should be left to the mother.
[/quote]


It is a scientific fact that the life of a human being begins a conception, that has been absolutely proven. But yes we all know for a pro-choicer thats not good enough because the statement you made, and other pro-choicers that hold have a mindset like that can still be compared to the Nazi mindset, because both believe in the superiority of one person over a other.

[pcabibi]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1135655' date='Dec 5 2006, 02:47 PM']
It is a scientific fact that the life of a human being begins a conception, that has been absolutely proven. But yes we all know for a pro-choicer thats not good enough because the statement you made, and other pro-choicers that hold have a mindset like that can still be compared to the Nazi mindset, because both believe in the superiority of one person over a other.
[/quote]

I'm not even getting into this with you. It's not a scientific fact that the soul enters the body during conception. It's speculation. It's not a nazi mindset... you just appear to be so passionate about your beliefs to the point that you are unable to tollerate a different perspective.

you can't proove when a soul enters the body of a person. Don't speculate like it's a scientific fact, becasuse that's just rediculous. Some will argue that the soul doesn't enter until birth. But to be honest... until science can tagibly pinpoint the existance of a soul... then you can't even proove it so this arguement is pointless.... which is exactly the reason why the definition should be left up to the person it effects closest.... the woman... until that proof is given.

[Kosh]

Look, its still a baby and you're still in favor of allowing it to die b/c the mother doesn't want it. Changing the language does not change that.
And he didn't say soul, he said LIFE. Big difference.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Kosh

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Kosh' post='1135744' date='Dec 5 2006, 05:52 PM']
Look, its still a baby and you're still in favor of allowing it to die b/c the mother doesn't want it. Changing the language does not change that.
And he didn't say soul, he said LIFE. Big difference.
[/quote]

What is life? Life is the existance of a soul on this planet until it is ascended to the next level wherever that is. You're right there is a big difference between life and the soul... but you wouldn't be protecting "life" if it wasn't a HUMAN Life... and the difference between human life and a microbe IS a soul... otherwise you'd also be protesting against antibacterial soap along with abortion.

[Kosh]

Only from a catholic perspective. The same argument can be used from a secular perspective regarding life.

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Kosh' post='1135760' date='Dec 5 2006, 06:01 PM']
Only from a catholic perspective. The same argument can be used from a secular perspective regarding life.
[/quote]

depends how you define secular. If you mean athiest then they do not make up a majority. Most people that aren't christian are still spiritual.

Edited December 5, 2006 by JClives

[Kosh]

My point is that the existance or non existance of a soul does not change that it is murder.

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Kosh' post='1135770' date='Dec 5 2006, 06:19 PM']
My point is that the existance or non existance of a soul does not change that it is murder.
[/quote]

Then by your definition using antibacterial soap is on a level of genocide previously unknown to man.

[Kosh]

no...antibacterial soap is not genetically human. Where did THAT come from? 0.o

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Kosh' post='1135775' date='Dec 5 2006, 06:23 PM']
no...antibacterial soap is not genetically human. Where did THAT come from? 0.o
[/quote]


Show of hands... who thinks abortion is wrong simply based on genetic similarities?

I'm willing to bet that not one person on this planet is pro-life using that as a justification.

Edited December 5, 2006 by JClives

[pcabibi]

You know what? I'm even going to go out on a limb and tell you that the way you demonize an entire group of people (pro choicers) has ALOT more in common with the Nazi's than the flimsy analogy you put forth.

[Aloysius]

JClives, you have admitted that you accept the fetus as a human person, correct? then explain to me why killing it is not murder?

sure, the fetus, aka human person, is a great burden upon the mother. but if it is a human person, then burdensome or not: killing it is killing a human person.

anyway, what do you mean by "genetic similarity"? at the point of conception the embryo has a unique genetic code; everything down to his eye color has been set in stone and all that is left is a growing process... a growing process which will not stop until he has reached about age 20.

anyway, the analogy works to pro-choicers more by comparing them to nazi-sympathisers than to actual nazis. folks who agreed with the German government's right to choose to kill those persons. you agree with the woman's right to choose to kill what you admit to be a human person. that's the same thing as agreeing with any person's right to choose to kill another human person; and since you agree with allowing it on a wide scale it becomes as bad as agreeing with the nazi's choice of the holocaust.

[avemaria40]

[quote name='JClives' post='1134844' date='Dec 4 2006, 04:07 PM']
This is such despicable right wing propaganda.

Hitler was Pro-Abortion... Not Pro-Choice. To even liken the two as similar is a gross and delibrate distortion of the truth.
[/quote]

If you're going to make that analogy, you might as well say that the German people were pro-choice since they turned a blind eye to everything, even though they might have been "personally against it"

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1135817' date='Dec 5 2006, 08:02 PM']
JClives, you have admitted that you accept the fetus as a human person, correct? then explain to me why killing it is not murder?

sure, the fetus, aka human person, is a great burden upon the mother. but if it is a human person, then burdensome or not: killing it is killing a human person. [/quote]

Aloysius, we've been down this road before and we've already shared our views of the scenery.

Let me explain to you my principles yet again...

1. Of course the embryo is human, it's not an alligator.

2. My issue is not with humanity, it's with the soul. The arguement that the soul has nothing to do with life is bogus. Murder to most spiritual people is prematurely sending a soul away from this life, not just ending life like stepping on an ant, although there are some religions that believe that is a sin as well. I can understand them being pro life. But if you've ever killed a bug or germs then you are exempt from this philosophy.

3. I have no proof prooving the embryo has a soul immediatley following conception.


Other humans that do not share my faith, the only common ground that binds us is what we can proove. We can not proove that an embryo has a soul immediatley following conception.... therefore we have no plausible reason to call abortion murder... except through faith, which is not plausible when creating policy that everybody including non belivers will live under. Hopefully the woman faced with this decision will choose life... But it's HER DECISION, it effects her... we lack enough substatial evidence to make a law telling a woman what to do with her body.

Therefore, I will not blindly take up and fight for a cause under the pretenses of faith, because matters of faith are best handled by God, not by humans. I'm not about to go on a crusade... haven't we already learned that lesson? All I can do is pray and hope that God changes the heart of the women that decide to have an abortion. Otherwise I risk becomming a fundemental zealot no different than an terrorist.




[quote name='Aloysius' post='1135817' date='Dec 5 2006, 08:02 PM']
anyway, the analogy works to pro-choicers more by comparing them to nazi-sympathisers than to actual nazis. folks who agreed with the German government's right to choose to kill those persons. you agree with the woman's right to choose to kill what you admit to be a human person. that's the same thing as agreeing with any person's right to choose to kill another human person; and since you agree with allowing it on a wide scale it becomes as bad as agreeing with the nazi's choice of the holocaust.
[/quote]

The german people didn't even KNOW about the holocaust. People were black bagged. you just didn't see them again. If you talk to any german that lived through the holocaust you would find out that they were SHOCKED and DISGUSTED to learn of the concentration camps. Further more, those were human people that have lived life just as I have... making it possible for me to empathize with that situation. As I said we can't even proove that an embryo has a soul, much less is a conscious life form. can you remember when you were an embryo? Can you envision what it would be like to be aborted, just like you can imagine what it would be like to be starved and gassed to death?

It's a totally unviable analogy, it doesn't make sense philisophically, and it doesn't make sense historically. The only comparison to Nazi's I see is the demonization of people according to thier believes.

[quote name='avemaria40' post='1135931' date='Dec 5 2006, 09:26 PM']
If you're going to make that analogy, you might as well say that the German people were pro-choice since they turned a blind eye to everything, even though they might have been "personally against it"
[/quote]

They didn't turn a blind eye. It was hidden from them. Big difference.

Edited December 6, 2006 by JClives